The bank accounts of journalist Vadim Boreyko were frozen after a civil claim for 71 million tenge was filed by a construction company in Almaty. According to him, the restrictions affected accounts in various banks, including cards and a pension account.
WHAT HAPPENED
According to Vadim Boreyko himself, he learned about the freeze on 27 April when he noticed restrictions in his banking apps. He later received an SMS notification about the imposed restrictions and the details of the bailiff.
The journalist said that after the notifications, he became aware of a civil claim filed against him by the construction company. At the time of receiving the information, he stated, the details of the claims and the grounds for the lawsuit had not been disclosed.
The court hearing in the case is scheduled at the Bostandyk District Court of Almaty for 19 May at 15:00 via video link.
Furthermore, according to Vadim Boreyko, the court issued a ruling banning him from covering the proceedings in which he is participating as a defendant.
“By a court ruling, which I only received today, I am banned from covering the court case in which I am named as a defendant,” the journalist wrote.
WHO FILED THE CLAIM
The claimant is listed as Bakhyt Kassybaev, acting under a power of attorney from LLP Etude-Ybyrai. The company is linked to the construction of the Premier residential complex in the 12th microdistrict of Almaty.
In the claim, Boreyko asserts, it refers to “systematic dissemination of inaccurate information” which, according to the claimant, damaged the company’s business reputation and led to property losses.
The amount of the claim is 71 million tenge.
WHAT THE DISPUTE IS ABOUT
According to the journalist, the topic of the residential complex had been raised repeatedly on his YouTube channel. The episodes featured appeals from residents of the microdistrict who opposed the construction.
Also, as Boreyko claims, one of the reports involved representatives of state bodies, deputies, and employees of the developer company. The parties expressed opposing positions regarding the permits and the legality of the construction work.
The company, according to the journalist, stated that it had the necessary documents. However, representatives of certain state bodies, he claims, reported different information.